A blog about making, teaching, and loving dance, written by witness-participant, Catherine Cabeen.

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

The Integrity of Anonymity

This is a series of excerpts from an essay that questions the
role of external recognition in our understanding of identity, and explores the
importance of doing unrecognized work for the common good. It situates identity
and environment as interdependent, re-framing the unseen labor of being one of
many, not as an affront to who we are, but as an essential aspect of our self
and our power. It seeks to inspire and support us as we allow our diverse
identities to breath into the space of shared experience and to celebrate the
integrity of anonymity.

As a teacher and artist I feel a void in our culture when it
comes to celebrating the huge amount of work that must often be done anonymously
as part of a political movement, scientific inquiry, or institutional
advancement. In order to align our society and education systems with
environmental sustainability and human rights, many individuals must work
together toward goals, which may have nothing to do with personal recognition. Social
media however, has turned daily life into a popularity contest of sorts,
amplifying the fear that we might cease to exist if we are not seen. For many
people, this has reversed of the cause and effect relationship of action to
recognition. Public recognition is increasingly a primary motivator for generous
actions, rather than a result of them.

The current presidential primaries reflect our culture’s
obsession with celebrity and delight in the entertainment value of baseless,
shocking claims made by overstuffed egos. At the same time they are revealing that there
are pockets of the American people who see very clearly that our political,
economic, education, and criminal justice systems have become corrupt. These
people are mobilizing behind a candidate who speaks almost entirely about
transforming American systems for and through “we” rather than “me.” The
realization that change in our governing systems might be possible is gaining
inspiring momentum, but its basis in the collective good is so revolutionary to
our egocentric American culture, that the mass media is still in shock. Many
Americans are casting votes for candidates who embody status quo selfishness as
a reflection of their own fear of equality.

Living in a hierarchical society, we are conditioned to
perceive the misfortunes of others as “good” for us. Through his, her, or their
loss, we are given the opportunity to look down at someone, giving us the false
sensation that we have somehow risen.

Numerous studies have shown that greed does not lead to happiness. Greed, selfishness, and our desire to be acknowledged as “special,” are
powerful motivators that separate us from our environments and convince us that
the only consequences of our actions that matter are the ones that we can
acknowledge as personally beneficial. Our culture does a fantastic job pitting
the oppressed against one another so that we will be so distracted by our own
disputes that we will continue to look the other way, as we are all taken
advantage of.

The Occupy Movement, Black Lives Matter, and the 4th
wave of feminism are all political movements that are charged by particular
events and individual stories, but which represent the interests and
experiences of large groups of people. Social movements have historically
consisted of masses fueled and organized by outspoken and articulate leaders,
but as the times change so do our ideas about participation and recognition.
The integration of media into almost every aspect of our daily lives, and the
resulting un-curated access we have to the construction of celebrity culture
via digital followings, has dual functions. Social and mass media both simplify
and accelerate the mobilization of large groups of people, and at the same time
they can feed the hungry ghost of the ego that often times wants to be
recognized as an actor more than it wants to act.

Current breakthroughs in the field of cognitive science
however, stand in direct opposition to the idea that we are individual agents
who must see others loose in order for us to win. The emerging field of Four E Cognitive Science investigates our self-realization, not through our isolated identities, but through our
engagement with the world around us. It also points out that every one of our
actions impacts our immediate and extended environments. The definition of mind and self articulated by Four E Cognitive Science supports us as we seek to break down the
outdated notion that we are protected, by the walls we construct to divide us.

Artists always seem to be one step ahead of scientists. Visual artist Carrie Mae Weems began a lecture in 2015 by saying that she was inspired by the simultaneous truth of two opposing
facts. On the one hand, we are living on a tiny planet in the middle of a vast
ever-expanding universe. On the other, we leave traces of our DNA on everything
we touch and these traces of our presence can remain in our environment for
thousands of years. The first observation points to our undeniable anonymity in
the eyes of universal forces. The other suggests that our every action affects
the world around us, and that through these actions our individual identities
are manifest and consequential. Both observations are true.

In his February 3, 2016 lecture entitled, Embodying the Extended Mind, Al Kaszniak, referenced the work of contemporary cognitive scientist and
philosopher Even Thompson and the late neuroscientist Francisco Varela,
who have reconceived the notion of “mind.” These figures are using Western
scientific methods to prove what Eastern philosophy has claimed for thousands
of years; the mind is not a computational device that is manifest in our brain
alone, but a process that arises from the interaction between living organisms
and their environments. Drawing on Thompson’s work in Four E Cognitive Science, Kaszniak describes mind as,
“embodied, embedded, enacted, and extended" and adds to these four E's that the mind is also, "evanescent.” This articulation of
mind-as-one-with-experience has helped me tremendously to understand how
illusory individual identity is. It does not deny that each of us has a
perspective, but it situates all of us as both in process, and interconnected.
It suggests that our world, communities, and cultures are in themselves,
recognition of our action. For me, the acknowledgement that my actions have an
impact on the world soothes the desire for further recognition. Both Carrie Mae
Weems assertion of contrasting dynamics our human condition, and this
articulation of the mind/self as an inter-subjective process, can help us to
reconsider our individual connection to the common good.

The embodied mind refers to the 2-way neurological streets
that connect our physical bodies to our brains and breaks up one of the oldest hierarchies we have been conditioned into,
that which separates the mind and body. “Mind” refers not to the workings of the
brain in isolation, but to the interaction between the brain and the rest of
the body.

Embedded mind refers to the depths of cultural conditioning.
Despite our efforts to think for ourselves, we are always making judgments in
relation to the web of ethical and aesthetic priorities that are woven all
around us though our societies. Whether we agree with or rebel against the
status quo, our minds are shaped by the cultural contexts in which we live. Our actions re-enforce cultural conditioning and we
become subject to what we assert, or as visual artist Jenny Holzer states in
her 1978-87 Truisms, “You are a victim of the rules you live by.”

Enacted mind refers to the interconnectivity of action and consciousness.
Through action, we become aware of our environments and ourselves. Numerous
studies have shown that not only does our physical and mental development
depend on dynamic sensory stimuli, but also, movement throughout our lifetime
is what makes us aware of our physical being. While we are in motion, the ways in
which our choices resonate with or fracture our environments, feeds back to us.
This feedback reinforces or inspires change in our minds and actions. At the
same time, each choice that we make affects the environment and society we
inhabit. “The path is laid in the walking of it,” Kaszniak asserts. Similarly,
choreographer Bill T. Jones once counseled me, “The answer is in the doing.”

Extended mind is an articulation of our desire to outsource
certain aspects of our thinking to external devices. Whether we are talking
about Google searches on a smart phone, the use of pen and paper to catch a
“to-do list,” books that hold histories, or artworks that communicate cultural
ideals, humans have long “extended” our minds through technologies. As our
integration with technology steadily increases it becomes increasingly
important that we do not becomes slaves to technology, but rather embrace and
fully utilize it as part of our extended mind in a process of collaboratively
co-creating reality.

Kaszniak deftly connects this evanescent definition of mind to
Zen practices that support our embodied understanding of the mind as a process,
not a thing. Key to this process is the interactivity between our mind and
body, personal and cultural histories, changes in our environments, and the
countless causes and affects of our actions. This articulation of integration
between an “in-process” individual and their environment, in turn this reveals
that our society is also in constant motion, which illuminates the potential
for change.

Seeing my “self” as a process that is co-creating reality
with my environment and community is a perspective that I find immensely
empowering. Similar to the dichotomy presented by Carrie Mae Weems, it suggests
that while my perspective is of consequence, it is also a product of
collaboration. “I” am making choices that are constantly informed by and
informing my environment. Hence, “self” improvement, and community improvement
are one.

Perhaps I find the idea of co-creating reality so empowering
because I have recently transitioned from the life of a full-time performer to
that of a full-time professor. As an artist I am primarily interested in
communicating ideas, and as a teacher I am overwhelmingly dedicated to
communicating ideas, so in many ways, this is really just a change in venue for
the same, on-going work. However, as you may well imagine, the shift in
lifestyle is rather dramatic.

My life as a teacher is decidedly less glamorous than that
of my still performing peers. The daily relationship to identity construction
and recognition seeking has been replaced by a daily rhythm of service. I
thought I would miss the spotlight, but instead I find that I am increasingly
drawn to the freedom, power, and integrity of anonymity.

As a dancer, one of the things I loved most about performing
was that I was part of something larger than myself. Though I was acutely aware
of the strain in my own legs, heart, lungs, and focus, I was also aware that I
was only one part of a moving painting, an experience being shared with fellow
performers, audiences, technical crews, funders, presenters, arts
administrators, etc. I have always loved working in community with others. At
the same time, I would be lying if I were to suggest that I, as a dancer, did
not consistently desire recognition for my tiny piece of the performance
puzzle. It is part of a dancer’s job to aspire to be luminous, and most of us
choose to perform because we want to be recognized for that momentary glow,
which is supported by a lifetime of work. We want to be part of a successful
production, but also to have the choreographer choose us for the featured solo,
to have critics mention our name as one of the shows’ many attributes, and many
of us eventually leave performance companies to start our own, so that our own
voice and name can be found in bigger type and bolder font.

In stark contrast, there is no spotlight on a teacher (that
is unless the teacher’s goal is to harness devotees instead of actually teach).
One who is dedicated to education as a form of growth and development can hope
to be admired and respected by one’s students and colleagues, but as a conduit
for knowledge, you can be assured that to the students you work with, your
voice will be one of many, co-creating the students’ paths.

One of the dance techniques I teach is the Martha Graham
technique. Graham (1894-1991) is undeniably one of the most important
choreographers of the 20th century. She created over 180 ballets in
her lifetime and revolutionized American culture’s ideas about dance as an art
form, gender and costume design, and the relationship between abstraction and
narrative in theater. She created an angular and aggressive movement technique
in collaboration with the dancers with whom she worked, in order to facilitate
the performance of her repertory. Graham technique is based in precise movement
practices such as the contraction and release of the torso, the use of spirals
and rotation to connect the limbs of the body to the core, and assertive shifts
of weight that allow a dancer to cover immense amounts of space in a single
stride. These principles are still useful today in relation to contemporary
choreography. Unfortunately however the technique is more often taught as a
form of idol worship, than as a series of principles. Graham’s notorious ego
would have it no other way. She worked in collaboration, but demanded sole
recognition for her successes. As a result, instead of being celebrated for its enduring underlying
principles, Graham’s legacy is quickly being reduced to a series of “Martha
said…” quotes.

As a part of this legacy I am beginning to notice, that
teaching through a singular historic figure or even through a cannon that was
established through a historic (which in America means racist and misogynistic)
filter, only serves to guide students towards imitation and reverence, not
towards the critical and creative thinking needed to inspire a generation to
move forward with their lives as agents of change in a troubled world.

The confusion between the teacher and teachings is not
isolated to the performing art world. There are teachers in all subjects who
use their positions of power over students to boost their own egos. The style I
aspire to when I teach is inspired by my study of Ashtanga Yoga and Zen
Buddhism, wherein the guru or teacher can take almost any form of embodiment or
experience in order to be a conduit that can open a student’s eyes to certain
truths. However, even in the long-standing schools of the supposedly
spiritually uplifting Yoga and Zen practices, egomaniacal teachers often prey
on the inexperience and devotion of their students.

Just because something is common and/or wide spread however,
does not make it right. Teaching anything in order to establish or maintain
power over others is at best a waste, and at worst an abuse, of education
systems. In his 1916 book, Democracy and Education, philosopher John
Dewey states, “Each generation is inclined to educate its young so as to get
along in the present world instead of with a view to the proper end of
education: the promotion of the best possible realization of humanity as
humanity.”

By teaching students to revere an individual teacher, we
keep our lesson plans locked in the past. They honor what has happened, rather
than what could happen. I share Dewey’s opinion that the proper end of
education is not to prepare students to enter the workforce and maintain the
status quo, but it is instead to empower and inspire students to change the
world, and to create new roles for themselves within it. Through education, we,
students and teachers, create reality together. My perspective colors my delivery
of information, as does the generation, ability, race, gender, class, and
curiosity of the students with whom I work. However, I seek to engage the classroom
as a collaborative space. One in which I lead by example, letting my identity
and anonymity dance an intimate duet.

Dewey also asserts, “The conception of education as a social
process and function has no definite meaning until we define the kind of
society we have in mind.” This brings us back to the political concerns that opened this essay. If we are
seeking to build a society of individuals who prioritize power over others as
opposed to power with others, then teaching students to imitate from a
celebrity pedestal will create the kind of followers that society calls for. If
instead we define the “best possible realization of humanity” as one in which,
community, human rights, and environmental sustainability are respected, then
we need to think about how individual teachers can become channels for teachings
that are much more consequential than any one artist, intellect, or cannon. In this
way perhaps we can develop educational models that celebrate the embodied,
embedded, enacted, extended and evanescent mind.

It’s one thing to say, we should all love each other. It is
entirely another thing to work tirelessly towards a society in which equality
manifests. How many of us are interested in that work, which makes the world a
more just place, rather than the work that attempts to put our name in lights,
leaving others in shadows? Can we begin to frame, and understand, identity and
anonymity, not as mutually exclusive states, but as simultaneously possible?
Can we anchor our identity in our works, as opposed to our titles? Can we, as a
culture, find ways to celebrate the integrity of anonymity, so that enough
individuals recognize their interdependence in time to create the ground swell
needed for a political revolution in the upcoming election?

I believe that the answer to this lies in the cooperative
efforts of students and teachers, educators and presenters, performers and
audiences, creators and consumers, scientists and religious leaders. For in
fact our identities are embedded in one another. Whether we are conscious of it
or not; we are all co-creating reality. To honor this interconnectivity and
work for the common good is to celebrate our embedded identities and allow the
integrity of anonymity to amplify the power of our actions.

About Catherine Cabeen

Catherine Cabeen, MFA, is an artist and teacher. Cabeen is the Artistic Director of Catherine Cabeen - Hyphen, a performance company that was founded in 2009 as a forum for creating dynamic, interdisciplinary performances that engage the body as the intersection for ideas.
Cabeen has received choreographic commissions from On the Boards, Donald Byrd’s Spectrum Dance Theater, TWU, the Visa2Dance Festival in Dar Es Salaam, the International Dance Day Festival in Byblos, Lebanon, Pig Iron Theater Company, and the Cabiri, among others.
The New York Times has called Cabeen’s Hyphen, “highly kinetic, complex... visually exquisite,” and “beautifully performed.” The New York Times, May 13, 2011.
Cabeen is a former member of the Bill T Jones/Arnie Zane Dance Company (1997-2005), and the Martha Graham Dance Company, among others.
She currently performs in her own work, and with Richard Move. Cabeen is also an Assistant Professor at Marymount Manhattan College and a regisseur for the Bill T Jones/Arnie Zane Dance Company.
For more information see catherinecabeen.com